click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121209
20121209
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the states rights folks, they would disagree with the characterization of round 2 of obama care with the supreme court upholding it. you're right the supreme court upheld obama care. what the states rights will point to sleeper strands in that opinion that are pro states rights. chief justice roberts for a majority of the court said it violates congress's power under the commerce clause. he's placing real restrictions on the commerce power which has been the ace through which the federal government exerted authority over the nation. second, there are real restrictions placed in the restriction clause rather than the individual mandate. that spending clause restriction is going to be significant. these are seeds to not be too much of a conspiracy theorist that the supreme court is planting that it expects to grow in the future. people who are concerned with state's rights are reading that opinion saying we have allies in the supreme court now. we can do more. >> it's part of why the reelection of president obama was so critical was because we're looking at potentially two more su
effectively set aside 31 state measures, constitutional and statutory. >> what you say about the narrow decision, we recall back to obama care. john roberts making the surprising decision on this that the mandate was not unconstitutional. do you think that john roberts takes into consider rationing looking at the ballot measures that won in maine, maryland, minnesota and washington state and thinks about the history of being the chief justice as such a young man, he's going to be on the bench 30 more years and wanting to be on the right side of history? >> frankly, i hope he does. i believe this court needs to get on the right side of history. they have moved in that direction with lawrence v. texas. i think all eyes are going to be on justice kennedy. who voted to accept these cases. many gay and lesbian advocates did not want the cases before the court. they wanted to weight before the issue goes before this court. so, the question is who? one possibility is justice kennedy decided before he left the court he wanted to make a statement in this area to change the legacy of the court. t
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4 (some duplicates have been removed)